I want to unit test my Core Data app (stress test with many records). Everything is set up for unit and application testing and working fine.
I would like to create many core data objects and then see if my graphing view controller still works. How would I do that?
If I create a test method in my MyAppApplicationTest.m test class the test will just terminate the app after the test and I have no way to interact with the graphing view controller.
Am I stuck with having to create the many records in my AppDelegate and delete that code later? Or is there a way to use the unit testing framework?
Thanks for your help.
There are several options for UI testing. However, in this case, I would suggest building a huge database, and keeping it around for various testing. You can optionally use it by setting a value on the command line, in the environment, or just in user defaults.
Come sample code to check user defaults, then environment for a setting...
static NSString * findOption(NSString *name) {
NSString *result = nil;
NSDictionary *options = [NSUserDefaults standardUserDefaults];
if ((result = [options objectForKey:name]) != nil) return result;
options = [[NSProcessInfo processInfo] environment];
if ((result = [options objectForKey:name]) != nil) return result;
return nil;
}
Note, if you just want to check command line parameters, instead of all domains of user defaults, you can use this...
NSDictionary *options = [[NSUserDefaults standardUserDefaults] volatileDomainForName:NSArgumentDomain];
Then, in your code that creates your persistent store, you can just see if the option is set...
if ((value = findOption(#"MundiLargeData")) && value.boolValue) {
// Create the persistent store with the pre-generated big database
// If creation failed, can continue with normal database as failsafe
}
Also, note that if you use SenTest for testing, it uses a command line parameter:
NSString *value = findOption(#"SenTest");
if (value) {
NSLog(#"Using SenTest: %#", value);
}
You can leave the code in, or #ifdef it out. It's pretty safe to just leave in there.
EDIT
Apologies -- I was going to add this immediately, but got called away...
Sorry about that. I never meant to imply that you ship your testing code. You certainly do not want to do that. I thought you were just looking for a way to load the big database when you were running the application so you could do manual UI testing on the device without having to compile a different version.
If you want to do something like that, then you have lots of options. You can write your tests as a category on the class that you want to test, and just exclude that file from release builds. If you give your tests a consistent naming scheme, like prefix with "test" or "runtimeTest" then you could have a method like this...
- (void)runAllMethodsThatBeginWith:(NSString*)prefix {
Class aClass = [self class];
Method *methods;
unsigned methodCount;
if ((methods = class_copyMethodList(aClass, &methodCount)))
{
// For this example, we only want methods that take no arguments and return void
char const *desiredEncoding = method_getTypeEncoding(class_getClassMethod([NSObject class], #selector(load)));
for (unsigned i = 0; i < methodCount; ++i) {
SEL selector = method_getName(methods[i]);
NSString *name = NSStringFromSelector(selector);
char const * typeEncoding = method_getTypeEncoding(methods[i]);
NSLog(#"%#: %s %s", name, typeEncoding, desiredEncoding);
NSRange range = [name rangeOfString:prefix];
if (range.location == 0 && range.length == prefix.length && strcmp(desiredEncoding, typeEncoding) == 0) {
#pragma clang diagnostic push
#pragma clang diagnostic ignored "-Warc-performSelector-leaks"
[self performSelector:selector];
#pragma clang diagnostic pop
}
}
// Don't forget to free the allocated methods array
free(methods);
}
}
It will find al the methods in your class that start with some name and return void and take no arguments. You can do other argument handling, but you will then have to deal with ARC related issues (since the compiler does not know for sure what to do -- it will at least give you a warning). Anyway, that's just to get you started... you could add type encoding as a parameter, and make it more generic...
Now, in your runtime code, you can just call...
[self runAllMethodsThatBeginWith:#"runtimeTest"];
It will run all methods that look like...
- (void)runtimeTestFoo {
}
If there are none, then it will just silently do nothing.
You can either exclude entire files with these implementations from the release build, or just exclude them with a macro ifdef.
Now none of your tests are compiled into the release, but they are for other stuff, and you can just call your tests anytime you want. If you know a specific test, then you can, of course, just use respondsToSelector: and conditionally run that specific test method.
EDIT
Hmmm. I thought you were looking for some way to dynamically decide what to do. If that's all you want, then just provide a subclass of the AppDelegate that creates the database...
- (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions {
// Create your mondo database
return [super application:application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:launchOptions];
}
Now, you have several options. In main.o, you tell it which app delegate class to use. You could use an option (#ifdef DEBUG), or an environment variable, or some other means to tell it which app delegate class to use...
#import "AppDelegate.h"
#define APP_DELEGATE AppDelegate
#ifdef USE_MY_SPECIAL_RUNTIME_TEST_DELEGATE
#import "RuntimeTestDelegate.h"
#undef APP_DELEGATE
#define APP_DELEGATE RuntimeTestDelegate
#endif
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
#autoreleasepool
{
return UIApplicationMain(argc, argv, nil, NSStringFromClass([APP_DELEGATE class]));
}
}
Or, it could just call NSClassFromString(#"MyTestingAppDelegate") to see if it is linked in to call it...
Or, if you want complete separation, simply create another target. Have the app delegate subclass in there, and use it in the main.m for that target. Link against all the other files.
Now you have a completely separate executable, that is identical to the "production" except it has a special app delegate that builds the database before launching the app.
Testing is hard. You have to know exactly what you want and do not want. There is no right answer that encompasses all situations.
There are MANY other options to this as well, like providing a config file in the resource bundle, including extra stuff in the app plist, providing a "guru" mode to the app where you can send it special commands during execution (like having it open a socket and reading special commands and sending back responses -- that way you can script scenarios for whatever you want, run them on your mac and remotely control the app -- there are tools for this as well).
Hopefully, one of these methods will fit what you are looking for.
Related
I have been trying to use objective c blocks for the first time because I have really enjoyed using closures in languages such as Python and Haskell.
I have run into a problem however that I am hoping someone might be able to help with.
Below is a simplest version of the problem I am having.
typedef void(^BlockType)(NSString *string);
- (void)testWithtarget:(id)target action:(SEL)action
{
BlockType block = ^(NSString *string) {
[target performSelector:action withObject:data];
};
block(#"Test String"); // Succeeds
[self performSelector:#selector(doBlock:) withObject:block afterDelay:5.0f];
}
- (void)doBlock:(BlockType)block
{
block(#"Test String 2"); // Causes EXC_BAD_ACCESS crash
}
So it appears to be some sort of memory management issue which doesn't suprise me but I just don't have the knowledge to see the solution. Possibly what I am trying may not even be possible.
Interested to see what other people think :)
The block is not retained, since it is only present on the stack. You need to copy it if you want to use it outside the scope of the current stack (i.e. because you're using afterDelay:).
- (void)testWithtarget:(id)target action:(SEL)action
{
BlockType block = ^(NSString *string) {
[target performSelector:action withObject:data];
};
block(#"Test String"); // Succeeds
[self performSelector:#selector(doBlock:) withObject:[block copy] afterDelay:5.0f];
}
- (void)doBlock:(BlockType)block
{
block(#"Test String 2");
[block release];
}
It's a bit hap-hazard however since you're copying and releasing across method calls, but this is how you'd need to do it in this specific case.
I am building my first iPhone/Obj-c app and I have a large amount of data-holding subclasses that I am passing into a cite function. To the cite function these objects are anonymous and I need to find a way to access all the variables of each passed object.
I have been using a pre-built NSArray and Selectors to do this but with more than 30 entries (and growing) it is kind of silly to do manually. There has to be a way to dynamically look up all the variables of an anonymous object.
The obj-c runtime run-time docs mention this problem but from what I can tell this is not available in iPhone OS. If it is then I don't understand the implementation and need some guidance. A similar question was asked before but again I think they were talking about OSX and not iPhone.
Any thoughts?
-(NSString*)cite:(id)source {
NSString *sourceClass = NSStringFromClass([source class]);
// Runs through all the variables in the manually built methodList
for(id method in methodList) {
SEL x = NSSelectorFromString(method);
// further implementation
// Should be something like
NSArray *methodList = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:[source getVariableList]]
for(id method in methodList) {
SEL x = NSSelectorFromString(method);
// Further implementation
}
The runtime is the same on the Mac as it is on the iPhone. If the other question does what you're looking for, then it should work. If it doesn't, file a bug.
In the meantime, given a Class, you can retrieve a list of all of its selectors using the class_copyMethodList() function:
unsigned int numMethods = 0;
Method * methods = class_copyMethodList(sourceClass, &numMethods);
NSMutableArray * selectors = [NSMutableArray array];
for (int i = 0; i < numMethods; ++i) {
SEL selector = method_getName(methods[i]);
[selectors addObject:NSStringFromSelector(selector)];
}
free(methods);
It's certainly possible to do this through the Objective-C runtime functions, but it's probably not the right way to go about it. Since you're creating the objects passed into the cite method, just have them each implement a protocol that cite can use to extract whatever information it needs.
Something like the Key-Value Coding protocol will probably do what you want:
http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/cocoa/Conceptual/KeyValueCoding/KeyValueCoding.html
Update:
iPhone OS 3.1 has associated objects. However, the iPhone simulator does not. If you want to test associated objects code in the simulator, you should file a bug.
See my SO question here.
rdar://7477326
Snow Leopard now has associated objects.
Is there a way to accomplish something similar without associated objects? (Specifically for the iPhone.)
I am pretty sure I saw something like this a while back, but I can't remember where. Something about turning any object into a KVC container.
objc_setAssociatedObject() and friends were added to iPhone OS 3.1, so if you have the option of targetting just 3.1+ devices you can in fact do the exact same thing as on Snow Leopard...
If you can't you can create a static dictionary of associations and monkey patch out NSObjects dealloc method. For various technical reasons this solution cannot be made to work correctly in the presence of GC (which is why apple added the association stuff), but since iPhone does not support GC that is a non-issue.
If you are just starting work on this project I highly recommend using the runtime functions and targeting 3.1 plus, but if that is not an option here is an example of how you do it.
LGAssociativeStorage.h:
#import <pthread.h>
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#interface NSObject (LGAssociativeStorage)
#property (retain) id associatedObject;
#end
LGAssociativeStorage.mm
#import <objc/runtime.h>
#import "LGAssociativeStorage.h"
/* We are using STL containers because:
1) Using Objective C containers can cause deallocs which cause recursion issues
2) STL containers are high perf containers that don't introduce external code dependencies
Ideally one could include a thread safe map implementation, but I don't need one currently
*/
#include <map>
typedef std::map<id,id> idMap_t;
typedef std::pair<id,id> idPair_t;
static NSMutableDictionary * data = nil;
static pthread_mutex_t data_lock = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
static IMP gOriginalNSObjectDealloc = nil;
static idMap_t associatedObjectMap;
static
void removeAssociatedObjectFromMap(id self) {
idMap_t::iterator iter = associatedObjectMap.find(self);
if( iter != associatedObjectMap.end() ) {
[iter->second release];
associatedObjectMap.erase(iter);
}
}
static
id newNSObjectDealloc(id self, SEL deallocSelector, ...) {
pthread_mutex_lock(&data_lock);
removeAssociatedObjectFromMap(self);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&data_lock);
return gOriginalNSObjectDealloc(self, deallocSelector);
}
static void initIfNecessary(void) {
if (!data) {
data = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] init];
// The below line of code is abusive... in the future the Objective C runtime will use it as evidence
// that I am an unfit software engineer and take custody of all my code
gOriginalNSObjectDealloc = class_replaceMethod([NSObject class], #selector(dealloc), newNSObjectDealloc, "v#:");
}
}
#implementation NSObject (LGAssociativeStorage)
- (id) associatedObject {
id retval = nil;
pthread_mutex_lock(&data_lock);
initIfNecessary();
idMap_t::iterator iter = associatedObjectMap.find(self);
if( iter != associatedObjectMap.end() ) {
retval = iter->second;
}
pthread_mutex_unlock(&data_lock);
return retval;
}
- (void) setAssociatedObject:(id)object_ {
pthread_mutex_lock(&data_lock);
initIfNecessary();
removeAssociatedObjectFromMap(self);
[object_ retain];
associatedObjectMap.insert(idPair_t(self, object_));
pthread_mutex_unlock(&data_lock);
}
#end
You could always have them stored in a singleton.
There are no good ways to do this in a generic category.
You can easily add data for an object by having a global NSMutableDictionary that maps from any arbitrary NSObject to whatever data you want. The problem is there is no way to know when the object is deallocated, so you cannot tell (in general) when the data goes stale.
The only generic way to solve this is to use method swizzling to replace the NSObject dealloc method to report the deallocation of the object and release your associated data. I'm sure someone has done this, but its such a hideous hack it would be very hard to recommend as a valid appropach.
Now, if your objects in questions have some other way to monitor life cycle (ie, some deallocation hook, like a delegate objectWillClose method of some sort), then you can hook in to that to release your associated data and that would make the technique quite straight forward and legitimate.
I'll add an answer.
I found the original blog post, it was from Steve Degutis.
It basically involves replacing NSObject's methods for valueForUndefinedKey:, setValue:ForUndefinedKey:, and dealloc. Then using a static Dictionary to store any undefined keys.
Just about as nasty and fun as Louis's solution.
Notwithstanding concerns for concurrency issues, why not just use global variables ? Even using runtime objc_set/get AssociatedObject() methods aren't you passing a "global" static variable address in which case you still have concurrency issues wouldn't you?
I have defined a constants class within my iphone program using the 'extern' and 'const' keywords as in the example described in:
Constants in Objective-C
At this point, I am trying to initialize some string constants from the contents of a plist file, instead of being defined right in the class, e.g., instead of having:
// Constants.m
NSString * const MyConstant = #"a constant";
I would like to have it initialized somewhere from the plist file. So far, I have done a test using the static +(void)load method, but I am not completely happy about it, e.g.:
// Constants.m
NSString * ALERT_QUIT_TITLE;
#implementation Constants
+ (void)load {
// this controller contains all the strings retrieved from the plist file
LabelsController *labels = [LabelsController instance];
ALERT_QUIT_TITLE = labels.alertQuitTitle;
}
#end
Using a log call I can verify that the load code gets called early in the app startup, even before the AppDelegate constructor. However, two things I see not good in this approach:
I have to remove the 'const' keyword, otherwise I get a compile error since I am trying to initialize a variable that is defined as constant
I get some sort of warning message about the autoreleased pool:
*** _NSAutoreleaseNoPool(): Object 0x50b330 of class NSPathStore2 autoreleased with no pool in place - just leaking
Stack: (0x905caf0f 0x904d8647 0x904e039f (etc)
I guess I could use a direct call to the Labels controller to retrieve the label, but I would like more to treat it like a constant having all the maint. advantages it provides.
Which would be the correct (recommended) way to initialize a constant from an external source, like in this case a plist? Hope you can help, I have lost a good few hours trying to resolve this!
Thank you in advance.
If you initialize from a plist file, then you do not have a constant. And you should not define it as such.
I am guessing what you want is to be able to treat this value as if it was a constant? And that can be achieved using lazy initialization instead.
NSString* AlertQuitTitle()
{
static NSString* title = nil;
if (title == nil)
{
LabelsController* labels = [LabelsController instance];
title = labels.alertQuitTitle;
}
return title;
}
Is there a good reason as to why you do not use the NSLocalizedString() macro to fetch the alert quit title?
The warning
As the warning states, you are executing the +load method outside of an auto release pool. Meaning that all calls to autorelease just leak memory. You can fix your method like this:
+ (void)load
{
// this controller contains all the strings retrieved from the plist file
NSAutoreleasePool* pool = [NSAutoreleasePool new];
LabelsController *labels = [LabelsController instance];
ALERT_QUIT_TITLE = labels.alertQuitTitle;
[pool release];
}
I would suggest using the NSUserDefaults method instead for storing data.
Load is called far too early in the process for most purposes. Even initialize is fairly early. As you've noted, there is no autorelease pool setup, so any use of it (which is quite hard to avoid) will give you warnings and possible leaks.
A better way to do it is to forget the constant entirely, and write LabelController alertQuitTitle to lazily initialize its database and cache its answer. Something like this (untested, uncompiled).
+ (NSDictionary*) labelStrings;
{
static NSDictionary* strings = nil;
if ( !strings ) {
// Allocate and laod and keep ownership of the NSDictionary
}
return strings;
}
+ (NSString*) alertQuitTitle
{
static NSString* alertQuitTitle = nil;
if ( !alertQuitTitle ) {
alertQuitTitle = [[LabelController strings] objectForKey:#"alertQuitTitle"];
}
return alertQuitTitle;
}
If you really want, you can convert alertQuitTitle into a macro and use that to easily create dozens of methods.
In your other code, if you really want to, you can write a method that caches the answer as well, but thats fairly pointless, instead just use [LabelController alertQuitTitle].
You can, if you prefer, use a singleton, but there is not much point even creating a single instance of LabelController unless you have other things for it to do - any data it needs can be stored as static variables. A singleton would be more inline with typical Cocoa behaviour though. Either way, the same technique will work.
To directly answer your question, it looks like you're calling load before an NSAutoreleasePool has been set up. Every thread needs its own NSAutoreleasePool; your main thread's NSAutoreleasePool is set up in main.m, which you can see if you open up that source file.
I usually initialize my application's globals in my App Delegate's init method.
But this looks like unnecessary optimization, and it's creating problems as a result. You should consider using string resources for something like this. See NSBundle localizedStringForKey:value:table:, and NSLocalizedString()
I’m sure this is a simple one, but it’s been elusive so far, and I’m stumped ...
How do I declare an Ivar so that it’s accessible from ALL Classes in a project?
[Don’t know if it matters, but the ivar in question is (an instance of) my Model class, whose data needs to be accessible to various view controllers.]
Best as I can tell from "The Scope of Instance Variables” in The Objective-C 2.0 Programming Language
... this would be by using the “#public” directive.
So I’ve tried this in the #interface block where the ivar is declared:
#interface ...
...
#public
ModelClass *theModel;
#end
... But when I try to refer to “theModel” in a different class, the compiler doesn’t auto-complete, and when I type it in anyway, the compiler shows:
“Error: ‘theModel’ undeclared (first use in this function)”.
I assume this is a question of Scope, and that I haven’t made the ivar available appropriately, but how? Somehow I need to access this, or make its pointer available somehow.
Any ideas would be VERY much appreciated. Many thanks!
Perhaps you forgot to put the instance variable inside the braces of the class where all instance variable declarations go?
#interface Foo : NSObject {
// other instance variable declarations
#public
ModelClass *theModel;
}
// method and property declarations
#end
Also, can you show us the code of how you are trying to access the instance variable from elsewhere? The proper syntax should be:
myFooInstance->theModel
where myFooInstance is a value of type "Foo *"
I make properties available to all views managed by a Tab Bar via a singleton representing my data model. This is efficient and allows all Views access to the data (as well as any other application elements. Creating the singleton is straightforward (there are a ton of examples on S.O.). The you just request the instance and get the property values you need.
Here is a framework fro creating the Singleton. The key points are the static instance and the fact that you do the initialization as [[self alloc] init];. This will ensure the object gets cleaned up correctly. All the methods at the bottom of the class are standard from the SDK Docs to make sure release calls are ignored (because the object is shared globally).
Singleton Boilerplate (ApplicationSettings.m):
static ApplicationSettings *sharedApplicationSettings = nil;
+ (ApplicationSettings*) getSharedApplicationSettings
{
#synchronized(self) {
if (sharedApplicationSettings == nil) {
[[self alloc] init]; // assignment not done here
}
}
return sharedApplicationSettings;
}
+ (id)allocWithZone:(NSZone *)zone
{
#synchronized(self) {
if (sharedApplicationSettings == nil) {
sharedApplicationSettings = [super allocWithZone:zone];
return sharedApplicationSettings; // assignment and return on first allocation
}
}
return nil; //on subsequent allocation attempts return nil
}
- (id)copyWithZone:(NSZone *)zone
{
return self;
}
- (id)retain
{
return self;
}
- (unsigned)retainCount
{
return UINT_MAX; //denotes an object that cannot be released
}
- (void)release
{
//do nothing
}
- (id)autorelease
{
return self;
}
You cannot access iVars from any other class.
You have to declare a getter/setter method to change or view a variable from another class - what you are really looking for are properties, that make it easier to define and access these getter/setter methods.
In your example above, you'd have the property defined just after the block that defines the local variable in the header file:
#property (nonatomic, retain) ModelClass *theModel;
In the implementation file you'd have the getter/setter created with the #synthesize statement just after the #implementation line:
#synthesize theModel;
Then if you have an instance of your class created, you access the class instance variable like so:
myInstance.theModel = [[[ModelClass alloc] init] autorelease];
The reason #public & #private are in there are to define visibility for subclasses (which, being extensions of that class type also get all the class local variables defined by a superclass), not for any random class.
The standard Objective-C way of doing it is to have a class method that returns the ivar
In your .h file:
+ (id)defaultModel;
and in your .m file:
static ModelClass * defaultModelInstance;
#implementation ModelClass
+ (id)defaultModel {
if (!defaultModelInstance) {
defaultModelInstance = [[ModelClass alloc] init];
}
return defaultModelInstance;
}
#end
although this will need tweaking if you need a specific ivar instead of just "a ivar that's always the same"
this type of design is used by many Cocoa classes i.e. [NSWorkspace sharedWorkspace]
Think a C global variable.
Adding:
extern ModelClass* theModel;
after the #end in the header will make the variable visible anywhere you include the header.
In the ModelClass.cpp file add:
ModelClass* theModel;
before the class implementation.
The variable will still have a value of nil until you allocate and initialize it though and you will be resposible for ensuring that it gets deallocated at the correct time.
THANK YOU ALL for the very helpful discussion on this topic! Clearly there are several ways to approach things here, so this is a very useful assortment of techniques.
Just to let y'all know that in researching this issue further, I ran across a couple of other very helpful pages, listed below. They include mention of the NSNotificationCenter, which I hadn't heard of before; as well as the idea of the "dependency injection" design pattern.
The idea is to keep "low coupling"(1) between the classes, making the code more modular & better for unit testing.
And while the 'notification' pattern sounds like a great idea, in this case it may be a bit overkill, considering that I only need ONE instance of the data model throughout the run of the app, and it doesn't change throughout.
Finally, even though the "#public" compiler directive is well-documented in Apple's Obj-C guide(2), I later found a fascinating edict in a different doc stating that it shouldn't be used! Quoted from Apple's own Cocoa Fundamentals(3):
"Give the proper scope to your instance variables. Never scope a variable as #public as this violates the principle of encapsulation. ..."
(Strange that they don't mention this in their 'Objective-C 2.0' guide where the directive is actually explained.)
Anyway, here are a couple of other links I found to be full of some great insights as well. FYI:
S.O.: "What’s the best way to
communicate between
viewcontrollers?"(4) <<
CocoaWithLove: "Five approaches to
listening, observing and notifying in
Cocoa"(5)
CocoaWithLove: "Singletons,
AppDelegates and top-level data"(6)
Hope these help. Anyway, thank you all again!
Best,
rond
P.S. Yikes! It won't let me post more than one inline hyperlink, so I'm listing them here instead. Obviously, they’re all prefixed by “http://” ... :O
(1): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling_(computer_science)
(2): developer.apple.com/DOCUMENTATION/Cocoa/Conceptual/ObjectiveC/Articles/ocDefiningClasses.html#//apple%5Fref/doc/uid/TP30001163-CH12-TPXREF127
(3): developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/CocoaFundamentals/AddingBehaviortoaCocoaProgram/AddingBehaviorCocoa.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002974-CH5-SW12
(4): stackoverflow.com/questions/569940/whats-the-best-way-to-communicate-between-viewcontrollers
(5): cocoawithlove.com/2008/06/five-approaches-to-listening-observing.html
(6): cocoawithlove.com/2008/11/singletons-appdelegates-and-top-level.html